Worth looking at both the quoted text here and •especially• the linked page, which is quite good.
-
The reasons we consider plagiarism to be cheating in school and malpractice in professional contexts are many of the same reasons that LLMs are not going to replace all knowledge-based human labor. (Details left as an exercise for the reader.)
And yes, a whole lot of what LLMs do •would• count as plagiarism if one of my students did it manually, and •should• count as plagiarism just the same if they use a machine to do it — not just in a “that’s cheating!!” sense, but more importantly in a “that’s not really doing the work” sense.
5/
One last example:
The first LLM code example that really made my eyes pop was early after the release of GPT, when somebody got it to combine Breakout with Conway’s Game of Life (a truly delightful idea). It worked!
Funny thing: the Breakout code and the Life code had a •completely• different style and flavor. Red flag. In about 15 minutes of web searching, I was able to find one of the projects (can’t remember if it was the Breakout or the Life half) which it had copied wholesale, with just a few variable renames. And the other half? It was in Python, but it used dictionaries where it really should have used objects — tons of `thing["prop"]` where it should have said `thing.prop`, and lots of other un-Pythonic stuff besides. It was a machine translate of code from another language, very likely Javascript.
The entire thing was a plagiarized Breakout and a plagiarized Game of Life, one transpiled, and all stuck together in a single run loop. To be fair, figuring out how to (1) run both halves of the logic from a single loop and (2) count the Life cells as Breakout bricks is work I'd cheer on from a second-semester intro CS student! It's not, however, quite what's being sold by these companies.
6/
-
IT WAS IN THE TRAINING DATA. Your test gave the machine a pile of correct answers and free license to plagiarize.
I remember people being wowed that Claude Code could implement a complete C compiler. But somehow it doesn’t sound quite as impressive when you phrase it as “given every existing C compiler as input, the LLM can produce a C compiler as output.”
2/
@inthehands @rayckeith Same with Mythos - the benchmark tests are in the training data. Cybergym tracks their performance and their website has a link to their github which refers to all the evaluation data being in huggingface (with the git repo link to it). It stands to reason that every model has been trained on the very thing they are then evaluated on.
-
@datarama @inthehands Miyazaki's headed for retirement (again), may I propose Guillermo del Toro?
@Linza @inthehands Miyazaki was born to make that movie, and it is a cosmic injustice of the highest order if he doesn't get to do it.
-
@Lily_and_frog @inthehands I think that has been said for plumbing—$1 for the part, $45 for the five minutes it took to install the part, $400 for the years of experience it takes to know which part and how to install it.
Yep!
But in the case of LLMs, it's thousands and thousands of years of experience + hundreds and hundreds of years of just... labelling the source material! -
@inthehands (Completely aside: I sometimes feel like I ought to learn French *just* to be able to read that one in its original language. It is very special to me; it was the first book I ever read myself.
Even more completely aside: Someone ought to give Hayao Miyazaki the rights to create an animated interpretation of it, and supply him with however much coffee and pure adrenochrome needed to keep him alive, active and in good spirits for however long that takes. And reward him with whatever he wanted - for example, the exclusive right to hunt Sam Altman for sport.)
@datarama @inthehands That is a reasonably achievable goal since it is pretty short and written in a very accessible language.
So feel encouraged to try if you wish to!
(As a French person, I never had to learn it the hard way, and admire anyone who does) -
IT WAS IN THE TRAINING DATA. Your test gave the machine a pile of correct answers and free license to plagiarize.
I remember people being wowed that Claude Code could implement a complete C compiler. But somehow it doesn’t sound quite as impressive when you phrase it as “given every existing C compiler as input, the LLM can produce a C compiler as output.”
2/
We need to consider the possibility that soon cp(1) will become sentient.
https://exple.tive.org/blarg/2026/02/12/the-pride-of-subject-hometown-here/
https://exple.tive.org/blarg/2026/02/07/on-the-crank-spectrum/
-
@datarama @inthehands That is a reasonably achievable goal since it is pretty short and written in a very accessible language.
So feel encouraged to try if you wish to!
(As a French person, I never had to learn it the hard way, and admire anyone who does)@temptoetiam @inthehands I can read Borges (slowly and with embarrassingly frequent dictionary breaks) in the original Spanish! That's actually one of the ways I maintained being able to at least read the language (though I struggle with understanding spoken Spanish, if it's spoken at a natural pace) since back when I took Spanish in high school.
(I can also read Russian children's literature - *very* far from my goal of being able to read the Strugatsky brothers' science fiction in the original language.
) -
One last example:
The first LLM code example that really made my eyes pop was early after the release of GPT, when somebody got it to combine Breakout with Conway’s Game of Life (a truly delightful idea). It worked!
Funny thing: the Breakout code and the Life code had a •completely• different style and flavor. Red flag. In about 15 minutes of web searching, I was able to find one of the projects (can’t remember if it was the Breakout or the Life half) which it had copied wholesale, with just a few variable renames. And the other half? It was in Python, but it used dictionaries where it really should have used objects — tons of `thing["prop"]` where it should have said `thing.prop`, and lots of other un-Pythonic stuff besides. It was a machine translate of code from another language, very likely Javascript.
The entire thing was a plagiarized Breakout and a plagiarized Game of Life, one transpiled, and all stuck together in a single run loop. To be fair, figuring out how to (1) run both halves of the logic from a single loop and (2) count the Life cells as Breakout bricks is work I'd cheer on from a second-semester intro CS student! It's not, however, quite what's being sold by these companies.
6/
As per my posts, I have the luxury of not having LLM vendors shoved down my throat, and I generally avoid them for ethical reasons:
https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/116581463138461199
But because this all these questions about the usage and limits of these tools keep crashing through my doors, all of our doors, whatever we think of the ethical showstoppers, well…
…fight off amazing percentages of LLM overhype with this one weird question.
/end
-
One last example:
The first LLM code example that really made my eyes pop was early after the release of GPT, when somebody got it to combine Breakout with Conway’s Game of Life (a truly delightful idea). It worked!
Funny thing: the Breakout code and the Life code had a •completely• different style and flavor. Red flag. In about 15 minutes of web searching, I was able to find one of the projects (can’t remember if it was the Breakout or the Life half) which it had copied wholesale, with just a few variable renames. And the other half? It was in Python, but it used dictionaries where it really should have used objects — tons of `thing["prop"]` where it should have said `thing.prop`, and lots of other un-Pythonic stuff besides. It was a machine translate of code from another language, very likely Javascript.
The entire thing was a plagiarized Breakout and a plagiarized Game of Life, one transpiled, and all stuck together in a single run loop. To be fair, figuring out how to (1) run both halves of the logic from a single loop and (2) count the Life cells as Breakout bricks is work I'd cheer on from a second-semester intro CS student! It's not, however, quite what's being sold by these companies.
6/
@inthehands i've noticed a trend in anecdotes recently where people are finding it harder to trace their novel-seeming LLM outputs back to inputs. i wonder if this is a result of them atomizing their inputs more finely, or being "better" at swapping the tokens around to make output look original. (an AI bro might argue that at some point human creativity is doing the same thing…)
-
As per my posts, I have the luxury of not having LLM vendors shoved down my throat, and I generally avoid them for ethical reasons:
https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/116581463138461199
But because this all these questions about the usage and limits of these tools keep crashing through my doors, all of our doors, whatever we think of the ethical showstoppers, well…
…fight off amazing percentages of LLM overhype with this one weird question.
/end
@inthehands Going further: if you could google the source for a HTTP server in JavaScript in 2015, the LLM should be able to output one in 0 (zero) minutes or it's failed.
-
@inthehands (Completely aside: I sometimes feel like I ought to learn French *just* to be able to read that one in its original language. It is very special to me; it was the first book I ever read myself.
Even more completely aside: Someone ought to give Hayao Miyazaki the rights to create an animated interpretation of it, and supply him with however much coffee and pure adrenochrome needed to keep him alive, active and in good spirits for however long that takes. And reward him with whatever he wanted - for example, the exclusive right to hunt Sam Altman for sport.)
@datarama
I know just enough French to have read Le Petit Prince in the original language (with some struggle), and…it really is beautiful in French in a way that translations don't capture. “On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur” can translate into English quite directly as “One does not see well but with the heart,” but it just doesn't have the same poetry and magic at all. -
@temptoetiam @inthehands I can read Borges (slowly and with embarrassingly frequent dictionary breaks) in the original Spanish! That's actually one of the ways I maintained being able to at least read the language (though I struggle with understanding spoken Spanish, if it's spoken at a natural pace) since back when I took Spanish in high school.
(I can also read Russian children's literature - *very* far from my goal of being able to read the Strugatsky brothers' science fiction in the original language.
)@datarama @inthehands knowing Spanish is a great stepping stone to learn any other romance languages!
Bon courage à toi -
@datarama
I know just enough French to have read Le Petit Prince in the original language (with some struggle), and…it really is beautiful in French in a way that translations don't capture. “On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur” can translate into English quite directly as “One does not see well but with the heart,” but it just doesn't have the same poetry and magic at all.@inthehands I've read it in Danish and English. I personally like the Danish translation best.
-
@inthehands Given pictures of a giraffe, a rhinoceros, an elephant, and a squirrel, find the squirrel. Feel free to reference dictionaries, encyclopedias, nature documentaries and previous responses to this same question.
@GalbinusCaeli
To be fair, this is an algorithmically difficult problem that was still largely an open question 10-15 years ago! Scale down your expectations by 2 or 3 orders of magnitude, and modern machine learning is truly impressive.Not a $10 trillion industry. But it's impressive in a “cool research” sense, and also in a “oo, that may pose serious societal danger” sense.
-
Back in 2023, OpenAI was hyping ChatGPT by claiming "it can pass the GRE".
When all it was doing was autocomplete of the answer keys that had been used as input.
@michael_w_busch
Yup. Same with passing the bar. -
As per my posts, I have the luxury of not having LLM vendors shoved down my throat, and I generally avoid them for ethical reasons:
https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/116581463138461199
But because this all these questions about the usage and limits of these tools keep crashing through my doors, all of our doors, whatever we think of the ethical showstoppers, well…
…fight off amazing percentages of LLM overhype with this one weird question.
/end
I'm as anti-"AI" as they come, but this is a much stronger argument against these systems being intelligent, or about to achieve a breakthrough, than it is against the claim that they are useful. The ability even to quickly retrieve a known right answer needle from a haystack of less useful answers (as opposed to coming up with a new right answer from first principles) would potentially be a valuable service, if it were reliable (and less inefficient, ecologically suicidal, etc.).
-
@Linza @inthehands Miyazaki was born to make that movie, and it is a cosmic injustice of the highest order if he doesn't get to do it.
@datarama @Linza
My own position on this is that the book is perfect, and should not be adapted.I'm pretty sure Miyazaki understands this — and if he •were• making an adaptation, it would be because he's actually writing a dramatically different story that is largely new material and profoundly different in its scope and arc, as he did with both Kiki and Howl.
-
@datarama @Linza
My own position on this is that the book is perfect, and should not be adapted.I'm pretty sure Miyazaki understands this — and if he •were• making an adaptation, it would be because he's actually writing a dramatically different story that is largely new material and profoundly different in its scope and arc, as he did with both Kiki and Howl.
@inthehands @Linza Hence, "interpretation".
That is kinda the thing he does.(BTW, I seem to recall him mentioning that it is his favourite book.)
-
@inthehands i've noticed a trend in anecdotes recently where people are finding it harder to trace their novel-seeming LLM outputs back to inputs. i wonder if this is a result of them atomizing their inputs more finely, or being "better" at swapping the tokens around to make output look original. (an AI bro might argue that at some point human creativity is doing the same thing…)
@joe
Yeah, people were having that same argument about humans and creativity on the more academic side of my circles back in 2023. It would be an interesting one if it didn't have all this investment money weighing it down! (Human learning, both technical and artistic, almost always starts with imitation and repetition; clearly it's a building block of this messy constellation of things that we call “intelligence.”)I do think the models are getting better at atomizing, as you put it, and I'm disappointed that there's not more research on this family of reverse-mapping problems. One question I've wondered about: can we quantify how much the output depended on a given input? e.g. how would the probability of given output have changed if the model were trained without <pattern> in its training data?
-
I'm as anti-"AI" as they come, but this is a much stronger argument against these systems being intelligent, or about to achieve a breakthrough, than it is against the claim that they are useful. The ability even to quickly retrieve a known right answer needle from a haystack of less useful answers (as opposed to coming up with a new right answer from first principles) would potentially be a valuable service, if it were reliable (and less inefficient, ecologically suicidal, etc.).
@bifouba
The would “right” is doing a bit too much work in that sentence, though. Remove it and replace “less useful” with “other,” and I agree.
